On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 12:08:30PM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Toshio Kuratomi <a.bad...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 10:22:58AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: > >> > >> It occurs to me that it would be nice if we made clean Python > >> packages available for some of the popular Unix platforms. I'm not > >> sure what would be involved in doing that, from a distribution point > >> of view. > >> > > If you're talking about a python that is carried by the OS in their package > > sets, updatable using the OS tools, etc > > That would be great. It might be enough to post pre-built packages. <shug> > <nod> There's a few ways to achieve that as well and it would be a lot simpler. There's the opensuse build system which lets you build packages for a variety of distributions. There's ubuntu ppas and fedora personal repos that let you host within the distributions namespace but are marked as being separate... Lots of different options there that might be suitable.
> > catch me on IRC (abadger1999 on > > irc.freenode.net) and we could talk about this. Off the top of my head, > > I think it would be possible with a few compromises but not easy in the > > decision department. > > Which makes it unattractive. I'm really not interested in getting > embroiled in a political process. > <nod> If going the route of getting a "clean python" into the distributions themselvs, there's going to be a good deal of politics as there are a lot of hard questions to answer there and a lot of contrary goals to reconcile. The idea of simply hosting package repositories for each distribution would be a lot easier in this area. > BTW, I really don't care about certain types of innovation (e.g. file > locations, wide unicode) as long as I as a developer don't feel them. > It occurs to me that it would be useful if there was a definition of a > standard Python that provided a baseline that developers could count > on. Today, the closest thing to a standard is the Python distribution. > I suppose that doesn't have to be the standard. Of course, defining > such a standard might be really painful, especially via email. It might > be a good PyCon discussion/sprint topic. > <nod> That could be a productive definition. > > The biggest issue I see is that it wouldn't be possible to fix bugs in > > these packages. Perhaps it would be possible to compromise and fix bugs but > > only when the patches are backports from the upstream repository > > I'm not sure what you mean. Bugs are fixed via Python distributions. > Is this not fast enough? > Correct, it's not fast enoguh. Many distributions move imuch faster than python releases. Even slow moving distributions can simply be releasing/releasing updates out of sync with when python itself releases. As an example, Fedora releases a new version every six months. Each release has a 13 month lifetime. During the 13 month lifetime, Fedora releases updated packages almost daily. So if someone filed a bug that python-2.7.1-1 had a segfault or a UnicodeError or some other bug that the maintainer felt was worthwhile to fix in the released Fedora, they would ship an updated python package (perhaps with a backport from python-2.x's tree or perhaps by coding a fix and then submitting the fix upstream afterwards) and make the update as soon as they felt they had a workable solution. > > but.... we > > presently do that in Fedora for firefox/xulrunner/thunderbird because of > > mozilla's trademark agreement and it causes no end of conflicts between > > contributors. > > I assume that wouldn't be a problem for Python, assuming I have a clue > what that is. :) > Well -- the causitive agent is different but the results are similar. In mozilla's case, the issue is adding code that mozilla doesn't endorse as with their permission you have to abandon the trademarks. In a "clean python"'s case, it would be that we want to enforce on ourselves to only ship what's in upstream. In both cases, it prevents fixing bugs and making other changes ahead of an external (to the distribution) schedule. -Toshio
pgp8OpvpQEaG2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
